Wilfork wants Seymour money

[Jimke]

Re: Wilfork want Seymour money

That's not what happened as I recall it. The agent was given permission only to discuss a trade (draft picks) not money. When the Jets talked money, the pats filed a tampering charge. But it was complicated.

Look up Deon Branch on Wikipedia.

Branch filed the grievance claiming the Patriots did not complete the trade between them and a team (Jets) willing to give Branch a contract extension.

 

[Pats726]

Re: Wilfork want Seymour money

Look up Deon Branch on Wikipedia.

Branch filed the grievance claiming the Patriots did not complete the trade between them and a team (Jets) willing to give Branch a contract extension.

And after that the Pats claimed tampering....OR was the tampering charge filed first??

 

[DaBruinz]

they did for seymour......they did for warren

Wrong. The Patriots did NOT tear up the last year of Seymour's or Warren's rookie contracts. Seymour and Warren both received their signing bonus for the new contract in the last year of their rookie deal, but neither of them got new salaries.

 

[Synovia]

The Vrabel cap hit is dead cap space, it cannot be reused, so it is not irrelevant. Say they sign another LB to replace the Vrabel for the exact same contract, now there is over $2M absorbed in cap space, but we have one player not two. Somebody has to take the roster spot. You could use all min sal guys to do it, but that seems non conducive to winning.





Don't lecture me on sunk costs son. Instead understand what someone is writing before you go off on ego driven jog. The money is gone true, and its more gone when a guy gets traded/cut, and it can hamper the quality of the roster if you create too much dead cap space. Hopefully you now understand.

No.


AGAIN, NO. You do not understand sunk cost.

 

[DaBruinz]

everyone is replaceable......you could replace everyone on the pats roster with everyone on the lions roster.......

everyone eventually gets replaced on every team......but the notion of everyone being replaceable is intended with the notion that everyone is replaceable and the result will still be the same.......for the last 5 years, that obviously has not been true...........

deion branch was not replaceable.......if he was, the pats would have won an SB in 2006 Huge assumption on your part.

daniel graham was not replaceable.......if he was, the pats would have won an SB in 2007 Another huge assumption on your part.


it's been obvious that the LB core has not been replaceable

brady is not replaceable

am I missing anyone??????

His saying that everyone is replaceable, is NOT saying that you could take everyone from the lions and put them on the Pats and the results would be the same. That is taking it entirely out of context and to the MAXIMUM extreme.

Saying that the Pats would have won in 2006 had they had Branch either you claiming to be Miss Cleo or just pure speculative BS. Same with Graham in 2007. There were plenty of other issues that kept this team from winning in both of those years. Some of them were outside factors that the team had no control over.

Reality is that no one knows what Wilfork wants for money other than Wilfork and the Pats. Not Clayton. Not Tanguay. Not Felger. We ALL know that Wilfork could be signed to a contract extension pretty easily as there are plenty of ways for the Pats to do that. Its just a matter of if/when it gets done. The Pats will probably wait until after they've signed their rookies and cut players (McKenzie won't be signed until after the season starts in all likelihood) to get down to the 80 man roster. That way the Patriots will, potentially, have freed up some more money.

There is still the chance that Green could be traded as well, unless the Pats have already paid him that roster bonus.

 

[DaBruinz]

Brady, Seymour, Koppen, Light, and Warren have to disagree

Miquel - All of them signed extensions and received their bonus money, but they still had the original salary as stipulated by their rookie contract. That came out during the Branch situation.

 

[BradyFTW!]

We'll do what we do - put the next guy in and either trade him or let him make the next move. I love Wilfork but life will go on without him.

#75 does not equal #12.

Agreed. Wilfork is a special talent, and hugely crucial to the 3-4, but I think people are going a little over the top in saying we should just give him whatever he wants. I'm sure that the Pats have assigned a monetary value to him, and if he's not willing to sign for that, he'll be franchised.

 

[BradyFTW!]

No.


AGAIN, NO. You do not understand sunk cost.

Trying to explain the concept of sunk costs on this board is a losing battle.

 

[VJCPatriot]

Re: Wilfork want Seymour money

IMHO, the drafting of DL's has more to do with the contract situations of Seymour, Wilfork and Smith than that of Green. The decision on Green is an independent decision. Either the coaches still think of him as still being worth starter money, or they don't.

The only problem with this theory of replacing Seymour is that NONE of the Pats draftees are 3-4 DE types. They are all too short or too slow to play DE for us. Brace is a prototypical 'strong' slow NT. The other DLs the Pats drafted this year are a little bit quicker but they are not tall enough to play at end like a Warren or a Seymour. If the Pats were interested in going DE, they probably would have taken Jarron Gillbert instead who has the size/length/athleticism for that position.

 

[Deus Irae]

Trying to explain the concept of sunk costs on this board is a losing battle.

ehhh.... It's often used in a misleading way, so it shouldn't be surprising that it's ignored.

 

[mgteich]

Re: Wilfork want Seymour money

I would have drafted Gilbert. No one knows the team's plans at DE. They can't be PLANNING to extend Seymour with no Plan B.

The only problem with this theory of replacing Seymour is that NONE of the Pats draftees are 3-4 DE types. They are all too short or too slow to play DE for us. Brace is a prototypical 'strong' slow NT. The other DLs the Pats drafted this year are a little bit quicker but they are not tall enough to play at end like a Warren or a Seymour. If the Pats were interested in going DE, they probably would have taken Jarron Gillbert instead who has the size/length/athleticism for that position.

 

[crowell33]

Warren got $18 million in the 1st 3 years of his extension.
Seymour got about $26.2 million in the 1st 3 years of his extension.
Haynesworth will get $41 million in the 1st 3 years of his extension.
Tommie Harris will get over 20 million in the 3 years of his extension.

I think that Patriots would like to sign Wilfork in the Tommie Harris range.

Thanks Miguel. Assuming your estimates are close, and that Gary Tanguay is being genuine about Wilfork's demands, the sides should not be far apart. Wilfork wants $8 million per, the Pats hoping for closer to $7 million per. As usual, the guaranteed money will be an additional hurdle.

 

[klinefan]

No way they extend him. They are preparing for his departure with the pick of Brace.

He's a great player (Wilfork) but in the Pats system he isn't worth the huge money apparently. Brace has the size and strength to do the job. He has almost a prototype NT body....whereas Wilfork actually has kind of short arms....

Pats can't pay everyone...Seymour, Mankins, etc. etc. etc. Someone has to GO.

I just wish they had a 3-4 so Seymour could leave next year too.

 

[slash83]

No way they extend him. They are preparing for his departure with the pick of Brace.

He's a great player (Wilfork) but in the Pats system he isn't worth the huge money apparently. Brace has the size and strength to do the job. He has almost a prototype NT body....whereas Wilfork actually has kind of short arms....

Pats can't pay everyone...Seymour, Mankins, etc. etc. etc. Someone has to GO.

I just wish they had a 3-4 so Seymour could leave next year too.

Not to be rude but this is one of the dumbest posts I've read since being a member on this board.

 

[klinefan]

Not to be rude but this is one of the dumbest posts I've read since being a member on this board.

I think your post is stupid. One of the stupidest ever.

It didn't even specify what in my post you disagreed with.

The pats have a history of getting the most for the least, not paying the most because some homerific posters have man crushes on some of their players.

They have a limited cap, Einstein, they can't pay everyone 8M per year.

Wilfork is good, not great, IMO. If Brace can do what he does for 1/4 of the market price, then I think they'll get rid of him.

You don't get value, by definition, paying top dollar for talent. You get value by getting talent for less than that via the draft. That frees money for where you have true holes. This is common sense economics. But that's probably going to be lost on a homer like you. The only places the Pats have paid top dollar is where they think the talent is irreplaceable, like Brady.

 

[mgteich]

To believe that Brace can give us what Wilfork gives is shows just how much you know about talent.

The reason for the 3-4 teams at the top being best at cap management is that they are able to squeeze cap money IN ORDER TO pay for their top talent.

When you think think that we can't pay our top defensive players (Seymour and Wilfork) $8M a year, you show just how little you understand about the cap.

To say that the patriots have only paid top dollar, and should only pay top dollar, for Brady shows your ignorance of the team and your lack of understanding of the importance of defense. For example, Seymour got top dollar last time he re-negotiated.

I think your post is stupid. One of the stupidest ever.

It didn't even specify what in my post you disagreed with.

The pats have a history of getting the most for the least, not paying the most because some homerific posters have man crushes on some of their players.

They have a limited cap, Einstein, they can't pay everyone 8M per year.

Wilfork is good, not great, IMO. If Brace can do what he does for 1/4 of the market price, then I think they'll get rid of him.

You don't get value, by definition, paying top dollar for talent. You get value by getting talent for less than that via the draft. That frees money for where you have true holes. This is common sense economics. But that's probably going to be lost on a homer like you. The only places the Pats have paid top dollar is where they think the talent is irreplaceable, like Brady.

 

[CoachK]

No way they extend him. They are preparing for his departure with the pick of Brace.

He's a great player (Wilfork) but in the Pats system he isn't worth the huge money apparently. Brace has the size and strength to do the job. He has almost a prototype NT body....whereas Wilfork actually has kind of short arms....

Pats can't pay everyone...Seymour, Mankins, etc. etc. etc. Someone has to GO.

I just wish they had a 3-4 so Seymour could leave next year too.

Not to be rude but this is one of the dumbest posts I've read since being a member on this board.

BINGO !! SLASH HAS BINGO !!

Unless big Vince is looking far north of $8million/year, IMHO he gets done before camp.

 

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

I don't think the Patriots want to extend Wilfork until they know what they have in Brace.

If Brace is not close to as good as Wilfork then you need to pay Wilfork. But if Brace is decent you then have to ask is Wilfork that much better than Brace that the best use of $6-$8 million dollars a year is to keep Wilfork and have Brace sit on the bench.

Wilfork's value to the NEP is directly tied to how good Brace is. Brace's performanace doesn't change Wilfork's value on the open market but does change his how much he is worth to this team. And BB won't be able to answer that until the season is underway.

 

[slash83]

I think your post is stupid. One of the stupidest ever.

It didn't even specify what in my post you disagreed with.

The pats have a history of getting the most for the least, not paying the most because some homerific posters have man crushes on some of their players.

They have a limited cap, Einstein, they can't pay everyone 8M per year.

Wilfork is good, not great, IMO. If Brace can do what he does for 1/4 of the market price, then I think they'll get rid of him.

You don't get value, by definition, paying top dollar for talent. You get value by getting talent for less than that via the draft. That frees money for where you have true holes. This is common sense economics. But that's probably going to be lost on a homer like you. The only places the Pats have paid top dollar is where they think the talent is irreplaceable, like Brady.

No need to specify what I disagree with the entire post is dumb.

 

[klinefan]

To believe that Brace can give us what Wilfork gives is shows just how much you know about talent.

The reason for the 3-4 teams at the top being best at cap management is that they are able to squeeze cap money IN ORDER TO pay for their top talent.

When you think think that we can't pay our top defensive players (Seymour and Wilfork) $8M a year, you show just how little you understand about the cap.

To say that the patriots have only paid top dollar, and should only pay top dollar, for Brady shows your ignorance of the team and your lack of understanding of the importance of defense. For example, Seymour got top dollar last time he re-negotiated.

You have no idea what Brace can give the Pats, so you are ignorant.

They squeeze cap money in order to pay top talent. That's what I said.

I never said they only paid top dollar for Brady. You are ignorant and just making things up. You should be beaten. Yes, I "don't understand" the cap. Drop dead you blow hard.

No kidding, Seymour got top dollar. How did that work out? Do you think the Pats want to pay their DL 25M? I think they're going to save some money IF they can, and I think they can.

We'll see who they sign...if they don't sign Wilfork and he moves on, then I will revisit this thread and rub it in your fat face.